Well, I'm sure your first option would give the Society an excellent idea of just how much of the Chivalry is still active, if formally proposed in the wake of a possible rejection of the current proposal. Enough SMOFing for me, though, my comments have gone in and cover everything I have to say about it in some detail. Paul Adler On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Stefan li Rous <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Actually that’s not true. > > I’m swinging around to Alban’s idea that we don’t need any more Peerages. > I’m still on the fence on whether we should simply put all martial combat > activities into the Knighthood or whether we should keep that as is and > create another Peerage for all other combat activities. But we don’t need a > plethora of different Peerages. > > I’ve always been told we already had 4 Peerages, with the ex-Royatly > making up the fourth. > > Stefan > > On Dec 5, 2014, at 8:43 PM, Vince Zahnle <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > As several have noted, nobody's really changing any minds on this. I've > submitted my own opinionated comments by email, I encourage anyone wanting > to argue pro or con do the same. I doubt the Society Seneschal is going to > see anything posted only on the Calontir list. > > Yours in service, > > Paul Adler > > -------- > THLord Stefan li Rous Barony of Bryn Gwlad Kingdom of Ansteorra > Mark S. Harris Austin, Texas [log in to unmask] > http://www.linkedin.com/in/marksharris > **** See Stefan's Florilegium files at: http://www.florilegium.org **** > > > > > > > > -- Manage your subscription at http://listserv.unl.edu. listserv.unl.edu > lists do not accept incoming email from Yahoo.com, AOL.com or Dropbox.com > due to their DMARC policies. -- Vince Zahnle COL, USA, Ret. -- Manage your subscription at http://listserv.unl.edu. listserv.unl.edu lists do not accept incoming email from Yahoo.com, AOL.com or Dropbox.com due to their DMARC policies.